Southwest Power Pool BUSINESS PRACTICES … · Southwest Power Pool ... Ross also made a point that...

Southwest Power Pool BUSINESS PRACTICES WORKING GROUP

Face-to-Face – SPP Corporate Center Little Rock, AR

Conference Call/Web Cast August 7, 2012

of 5

-SUMMARY OF ACTIONS TAKEN- # MOTION PROVIDED BY

(SECOND) STATUS

1 Motion to approve minutes of the June 25, 2012, BPWG meeting as published.

Rick McCord (Ed Hammons)

Approved Unanimously

-SUMMARY OF ACTION ITEMS- # ACTION ITEMS ASSIGNED TO 1. Revise BPR031 to allow DC Tie-only requests for Long-

term transmission service and retain the ability to “pancake” SPP transmission service requests.

Clint Savoy

2. Research whether not allowing hourly service to be profiled was in conflict with pro forma.

Clint Savoy

3. Re-open the previously discussed BPR025 dealing with relevant timing issue and waiver requests/approvals, with a goal of establishing a Waiver Submission process.

Jim Hotovy, Richard Ross




of 5

AGENDA ITEM 1 - ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS a) Chairman Grant Wilkerson called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. There were 21

people in attendance, representing 9 BPWG members, 5 SPP Staff members, and 7 guests.(Attachment 1 – BPWG_Attendance_Record_8_7_2012)

b) Rob Anklam and Jenni Leger were introduced as new Members of the BPWG. Chairman Wilkerson also informed the group that there is one open position still remaining on the BPWG roster.

c) There were no proxies submitted for this meeting.

d) Rick McCord made a motion to approve the minutes of 6/25/2012 as published. The motion received a second from Ed Hammons and was unanimously approved.

e) The agenda was reviewed, revised, and accepted. (Attachment 2 – BPWG_REVISED_Agenda 8_7_2012).

AGENDA ITEM 2 – ELECTION OF VICE-CHAIR Chairman Wilkerson opened the floor for nominations for the Vice-Chairman position because of Robert Walker’s resignation from the BPWG. Rick McCord was nominated and unanimously approved as Vice-Chair.

AGENDA ITEM 3 – REVIEW OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS

Clint Savoy reviewed the past action items with the group, all of which would be discussed during this meeting.

AGENDA ITEM 4 – BPR031 – TSR AUTOMATION Clint Savoy presented Business Practice Revision Request (BPR) 031 (Attachment 3 – BPR031 – TSR Automation), revisions submitted by Staff to several Business Practices (1500, 1700, and 2350) to accommodate the automation of short term Transmission Service Request (TSR) processing. The suggested revisions included no longer allowing DC Tie-only TSRs, limiting the combining of TSRs (a.k.a. “pancaking”) to grandfathered agreements not under the Tariff, and limiting the ability to profile TSRs to Yearly service only. Meeting participants discussed the revisions and provided feedback. When asked why these revisions were necessary SPP Staff responded that not implementing these revisions could have both a monetary and staffing impact on the initiative to automate




of 5

TSR processing. After discussing the quantitative details, the group determined that the potential revenues warranted allowing the ability to “pancake” reservations. Group consensus was to continue to allow DC Tie-only requests for firm transmission service, keeping the ability to “pancake” SPP transmission service requests, and to research whether not allowing hourly service to be profiled was in conflict with pro forma.

Action Item: Clint Savoy to revise BPR031 to allow DC Tie-only requests for firm transmission service and retain the ability to “pancake” SPP transmission service requests. Also, Mr. Savoy will research whether not allowing hourly service to be profiled was in conflict with pro forma.

REVISED AGENDA ITEM 5 – RESERVATION AND SCHEDULING IN THE INTEGRATED MARKETPLACE DISCUSSION Bert Bressers lead the group in a discussion about reserving and scheduling transmission service after the Integrated Marketplace goes live in March 2014. The main point of discussion was the ability to arrange transactions to and from the SPP Market without having to select a specific source or sink. Mr. Bressers stepped through a presentation (Attachment 4 - BPWG_Reservations and Scheduling in the Integrated Marketplace_BBressers) describing the potential impacts of allowing for transactions to and from the SPP Market. Richard Ross stated that unless the proposed changes remedy AEP’s inability to schedule into Entergy it was very unlikely he would support them. Mr. Ross also made a point that SPP could be used as a POR or POD without a major impact to accounting systems because sources and sinks are mapped to “transmission zones” behind the scenes today and this would not be a change. Grant Wilkerson expressed concerns of these market-to-market transactions causing differences between the Day-Ahead and Real-Time markets.

REVISED AGENDA ITEM 6– GENERATOR INTERCONNECTION AND AG STUDY IMPROVEMENTS

Lanny Nickell presented the four (4) top Ag Study and Generator Interconnection Improvement suggestions acquired through the InnoCentive posting. (Attachment 5 – External Think Tank)

InnoCentive is a web-based open innovation, crowd-sourcing, and prize competition coordinator that enables organizations to solve their key problems by connecting them to diverse sources of innovation including employees, customers, partners, and the world’s largest problem solving marketplace.




of 5

The submitted approaches were reviewed and discussed. Mr. Nickell advised the group that SPP now needs to respond to InnoCentive and indicate how SPP wishes to allocate the $10,000 award; to which submission and in what amount. Mr. Nickell cautioned the group that until such awards are made, all submissions are considered to be the intellectual property of the respective authors.

Richard Ross suggested that Mr. Nickell allocate awards as appropriate. Once the awards have been accepted, Charles Hendrix and Steve Purdy will determine how and where to incorporate the supplied solutions.

Mr. Nickell will advise once the awards have been made.

AGENDA ITEM 7 – EVALUATING WAIVER REQUESTS The group discussed the waiver evaluation process and the attendance thresholds. There was a desire to bring framework to the analysis process, as well as to obtain action delegation from the Board of Directors to the MOPC. One participant suggested that MOPC would be given authority to approve the waivers with the Board of Directors only being required to approve those waivers that are debatable or controversial.

Action Item: James Hotovy and Richard Ross agreed to re-open the previously discussed BPR025 dealing with relevant timing issue and waiver requests/approvals, with a goal of establishing a Waiver Submission process.

AGENDA ITEM 8 – TOUR OF SPP CORPORATE CENTER

Clint Savoy gave the in-person participants a tour of the business offices at the new SPP Corporate Center.

AGENDA ITEM 9 – FUTURE MEETINGS

The next meeting will be a face-to-face at the Kansas City Airport Marriott on Wednesday, September 12, 2012, from 9:00 am CDT to 3:00 pm CDT.




of 5

AGENDA ITEM 10 - ADJOURNMENT Chairman Wilkerson adjourned the meeting at 2:15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Clint Savoy

BPWG Secretary

BUSINESS PRACTICES WORKING GROUP Meeting Attendance

August 7, 2012

NAME ATTENDANCE STATUS COMPANY E‐MAIL PHONE Grant Wilkerson Y M Westar [email protected] 785‐575‐8074 David Adamczyk Y M KCPL [email protected] 952‐984‐3747 Ed Hammons Y M GRDA [email protected] James Hotovy Y M NPPD [email protected] 918‐599‐2966 Rick McCord Y M EDE [email protected] 417‐625‐5129 Jenni Leger Y M Tenaska Richard Ross Y M American Electric Power [email protected] Jessica Collins Y M Xcel Energy Robert Anklam Y M Cargill [email protected] 402‐563‐5674 Clint Savoy Y S SPP [email protected] 501‐614‐3590 Ken Quimby Y S SPP Charles Hendrix Y S SPP Jimmy Womack Y S SPP Lanny Nickell Y S SPP Bert Bressers Y S SPP Chris Lyons Y G Exelon Kristen Rodriguez Y G The Wind Coalition Jim Krajecki Y G Mark Mortensen Y G Rainbow Energy Rob Jones Y G GRDA Steve Gaw Y G Status: M – Member P – Proxy S – SPP Staff G – Guest

Southwest Power Pool, Inc. BUSINESS PRACTICES WORKING GROUP MEETING

August 7, 2012 9:00am to 4:00pm CDT

Face-to-Face - SPP Corporate Center – Little Rock, AR Conference Call and Webcast

• A G E N D A •

1. Administrative Items ................................................................................................. Grant Wilkerson

a. Call to Order

b. Introduction of new Members – Robert Anklam and Jenni Leger

c. Receipt of Proxies

d. Approve minutes of 6/25/2012 meeting

e. Review the Agenda

2. Election of Vice-Chair .............................................................................................. Grant Wilkerson

3. Review of previous Action Items ...................................................................................... Clint Savoy

4. BPR031 – TSR Automation (9:30-10:50) ........................................................................ Clint Savoy

BREAK – 10 minutes

5. Reservation and Scheduling in the Integrated Marketplace (11:00-12:00) ................. Bert Bressers

LUNCH – 1 hour30 minutes

6. Generator Interconnection and Ag Study Improvements (1:00-3:00) ...................... Grant Wilkerson

6.7. Evaluating Waiver Requests

7.8. Tour of SPP Corporate Center (3:00-4:00) ........................................................................ SPP Staff

8.9. Future Meetings ............................................................................................................... Clint Savoy

a. None currently scheduled

b. Teleconference options:

9.10. .......................................................................................................................................................... Adjourn ....................................................................................................................... Grant Wilkerson

Business Practice Revision

Page 1 of 8

BPR Number BPR031 BPR

Title TSR Automation

Business Practice Section(s) Requiring Revision (include Section No., Title, and Protocol Version)

1500 – DC Ties 2350 – Combining SPP Transmission Service Requests 1700 – Profiling Transmission Service

Impact Analysis Required (Yes or No)

MMU Report Required (Yes or No) No Requested Resolution (Normal or Urgent) Normal

Revision Description

In preparation for the Integrated Marketplace, SPP Tariff Administration is looking to free up resources by automating the TSR and tag validation processes. These Business Practice Revisions allow for the least cost solution to automating the TSR and tag evaluation processes.

Reason for Revision

SPP received an impact assessment from a vendor to update the current systems used to process TSRs and tags and found that making minor changes to the Business Practices would be less costly to implement from a monetary and testing resources perspective. These revisions remove the ability to “pancake”, or combine, multiple SPP reservations, submit a DC Tie-only request, and profile hourly Transmission Service Requests a well as remove the “delayed offering” requirement.

Tariff Implications or Changes (Yes or No; If yes include a summary of impact and/or specific changes)

No

Criteria Implications or Changes (Yes or No; If yes include a summary of impact and/or specific changes)

No

Credit Implications (Yes or No, and summary of impact)

No

Working Group/Committee Review and Results

BPWG – ORWG – RTWG – TWG – MOPC –


Page 2 of 8

Sponsor Name E-mail Address Company Company Address Phone Number Fax Number

Proposed Business Practice Language Revision

1500 DC TIES (return to TOC) SPP administers transmission service across two sets of DC Ties, two to ERCOT and three to WECC. Services across these ties have different criteria. The basic approach to reserving service is the same as for other SPP service. However, since these are ties connecting to transmission providers outside the Eastern Interconnection, some additional actions are involved.

Business Practice ERCOT Both DC ties to ERCOT are owned and operated by AEP, an SPP transmission owner. SPP will limit the amount of transmission service granted across the DC ties in each direction to the capacity of the tie. If counter-flow schedules exist across the DC ties, SPP may grant additional non-firm service in excess of the DC tie capacity but not to exceed the transmission capacity scheduled in the opposite direction and in no case will SPP grant more than twice the capacity of the DC tie in any direction. Transmission service sold across the DC ties as a result of capacity created by counter-flows is curtailed with all other counter-flow purchases, on a pro rata basis. The following requirements must be met to reserve SPP OATT service across the two ERCOT DC Ties at Oklaunion (ERCOTN) and Welsh (ERCOTE)1.

• The SPP portion of the service must include a valid SPP POR/POD set with an appropriate DC tie (ERCOTE or ERCOTN).

• The request must include the ultimate source / sink system within the Eastern Interconnection, and either the ultimate source / sink within ERCOT or the DC tie identified as the POR or POD, unless service is being requested for unidirectional capacity exclusively for the DC tie.

• Service may be sold, upon request, to provide unidirectional capacity exclusively on the DC tie. That service will have to be linked with another SPP reservation

1 Additional facilities usage fees may be incurred for use of transmission service inside the ERCOT region and be billed by companies other than

SPP. See ERCOT

for transmission service reservation and scheduling practices for use of facilities within ERCOT.


Page 3 of 8

showing the true Source/Sink or, if the service is firm, it can be redirected. To specify that service is being requested into an ERCOT tie, the reservation shall show the true source as either ERCOTE or ERCOTN and the appropriate DC tie as the POR, POD and sink. Comments showing the direction of flow must also be shown in the Customer Comments area of the request so that all customers may identify the direction of flow.

• To specify that service is being requested out of an ERCOT tie, the reservation shall show the true sink as either ERCOTE-SPP or ERCOTN-SPP and the appropriate DC tie as the POR, POD and source. Example: Service into ERCOT across the ERCOTE tie

Source = ERCOTE-SPP

POR = ERCOTE

POD = ERCOTE

Sink = ERCOTE

WECC The DC ties to WECC are separately owned and operated. All of these connect to the Southwestern Public Service Co (SPS – An Xcel Energy Company) transmission system, which is under the SPP OATT. The Blackwater (BLKW) tie is owned and operated by Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM). The Eddy County tie (EDDY) is owned by El Paso Electric (EPE) and Texas - New Mexico Power (TNP) but operated by SPS. The Lamar tie is owned and operated by Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCO). SPP will limit the amount of Non-Firm transmission service granted across the BLKW and EDDY DC ties in each direction to the capacity of the tie. If the WECC provider allows and counter-flow schedules exist across the DC ties, SPP may grant additional non-firm service in excess of the DC tie capacity but not to exceed the transmission capacity scheduled in the opposite direction and in no case will SPP grant more than twice the capacity of the DC tie in any direction. Transmission services sold across the DC ties as a result of capacity created by counter-flows are curtailed with all other counter-flow purchases, on a pro rata basis. The WECC does not allow additional Firm service to be sold based on counterflow and SPP does not sell additional Firm service based on counterflow; therefore no additional Firm service in excess of the capacity of the tie will be sold against schedules flowing in the opposite direction. The following requirements must be met to reserve SPP OATT service up to the WECC DC Ties LAMAR, BLKW and EDDY.

• The SPP portion of the service must include a valid SPP POR/POD with an

appropriate WECC tie (LAMAR, BLKW or EDDY).


Page 4 of 8

• The request must include the ultimate source / sink system within the Eastern Interconnection and the ultimate Source / Sink within the Western Interconnection or the DC tie identified as the POR or POD, unless service is being requested for unidirectional capacity exclusively for the DC tie.

• Service may be sold, upon request, to provide unidirectional capacity exclusively on the DC tie. This service will have to be linked with another SPP reservation showing the true Source/Sink or, if the service is firm, it can be redirected. To specify that service is being requested into a WECC tie, the reservation shall show the true source as either LAMAR_SPP, BLKW-SPP or EDDY-SPP and the appropriate DC tie as the POR, POD and sink. Comments showing the direction of flow must also be shown in the Customer Comments area of the request so that all customers may identify the direction of flow.

• To specify that service is being requested out of a WECC tie, the reservation shall show the true sink as either LAMAR-SPP, BLKW-SPP or EDDY-SPP and the appropriate DC tie as the POR, POD and source. Example: Service into WECC across the BLKW tie

Source = BLKW-SPP

POR = BLKW

POD = BLKW

Sink = BLKW

• Transmission service must be reserved with both SPP for the SPP portion (SPP OASIS site2) and the appropriate WECC Transmission Providers for the WECC portion of the service.

• SPP emphasizes to customers that they must get service from the owner of LAMAR (PSCO), BLKW (PNM) or Eddy (EPE, and/or TNP) to be able to go out of SPP from SPS across the DC ties.

Additional General Rules SPP will not offer any service above the continuous operating capability rating of the ties except non-firm service under counter flow situations where schedules in the opposite direction have been submitted. Any counter flow schedules must be profiled to flow for the entire duration of the new reservation request before any new request would be considered that would make the total reserved in one direction above the continuous capability of the tie. SPP will not knowingly sell more across the ties than can be accommodated during maintenance or other times when the ties may be de-rated. However, outage and de-

2 SPP OASIS site - http://www.oatioasis.com/spp_default.html


Page 5 of 8

rating situations will arise from time-to-time. If there is an outage on the SPP AC system that prevents SPP from allowing schedules to the full amount sold, pro rata curtailments based on NERC TLR procedures will be enforced and rebates for curtailment periods will be made. For the ERCOT DC Ties, these rules will also apply when the curtailment is necessary due to the DC Tie facilities themselves. For curtailments due to AC system problems in WECC or ERCOT or for problems on the WECC DC Ties, there will be no rebate of SPP service. Curtailment procedures will also be the responsibility of the ERCOT ISO or the appropriate WECC entity. SPP will not immediately offer for resale capacity across a DC tie which is made available due to the voluntary actions of an entity that holds the rights to the DC tie. These actions include, but are not limited to, the following processes:

• A tag with the priority of 7-F, 7-FN, or 6-NN has been cancelled, terminated, or withdrawn.

• A NITS reservation has been annulled. • A request to undesignate a Designated Network Resource causes capacity to be

made available across a DC tie. • A firm transmission service reservation for a DC tie has been redirected to

another path so that the entity submitting the redirect no longer holds capacity of the same DC tie. The capacity is not considered “available” until a request to redirect has been confirmed on OASIS, therefore the capacity will not be posted until a request to redirect reaches a status of CONFIRMED.

• A DC tie returning to service earlier than the end of the scheduled outage time posted on the OASIS DC Tie Update page.

To ensure fair and open access, the capacity will be made available at the top of the next hour if it can be posted for a minimum of thirty (30) minutes. If there is less than 30 minutes until the top of the hour, the ATC will not be made available until the top of the following hour. The available capacity will be granted using the same process that is used at Noon of each day for Non-Firm service. This capacity may still be bumped by the scheduling of a higher priority service. A notice will be posted on the SPP OASIS specifying how much capacity is available and for how long.

**Note** The highlighted portion of Business Practice 1500 above will be effective February 1, 2012 at 00:00 CST.


Page 6 of 8

2350 COMBINING SPP TRANSMISSION SERVICE REQUESTS (return to TOC) SPP performs a flow-based analysis, using the source and sink information, of each transmission service request made. It is expected that each request will indicate the true source and sink of the intended transaction. There are occasions, however, where a customer has a need to purchase additional transmission service from SPP to be combined with other SPP transmission service or service that is grand-fathered with respect to the SPP OATT. In those cases, the following SPP business practice exists. When requesting transmission service under the SPP OATT that is being combined with another

request for transmission service under the SPP OATT, or combined with service that is grand-

fathered with respect to the SPP OATT:

• The transmission customer will specify the POR and POD3 on the service being

requested that is needed to form a contiguous scheduling path when combined with the other transmission service.

• The source and sink identified must represent the true source and sink4 of the

transaction. • The customer must include comments that the request is being combined with other

SPP transmission service or service that is grand-fathered with respect to the SPP OATT.

• When the original request has a source or sink that is to or from a first tier BA or

beyond:

o With the exception of AECI, there will be no requirement to procure third party transmission service to combine SPP transmission service. (If AECI is on the path they must be listed as a scheduling entity)

o When scheduling combined SPP service it is not required to list the first tier BA in the scheduling entity portion of the tag.

For example: Existing reservation POR = AMRN POD = EES SOURCE= MISO SINK = EES Combining reservation with new source of OPPD 3 Business Practice 2100 – see Valid Reservation POR/POD

4 Business Practice 2150 - see Valid Reservation Source/Sink


Page 7 of 8

POR = OPPD POD = AMRN SOURCE = OPPD SINK = EES MISO is NOT required to be listed as a Scheduling Agent on the tag. Combining SPP service with different priorities will result in an overall SPP priority equal to that of

the lowest SPP segment. When combining reservations that result in delivery to an SPP border

and receipt from an SPP border, the appropriate transmission service must also be obtained from

the bordering transmission provider(s).

Explanation / Rationale When a request for service is to be combined with another request under the SPP OATT or transmission service grand-fathered with respect to the SPP OATT, the impact on the tTransmission system System must be evaluated based on their combined effect. If evaluated separately when purchased, the effects on the transmission system could be substantially different from the effects realized when both requests are combined to complete a transaction. Therefore, in order to accurately analyze the impacts of the intended transaction on the system, SPP requires the true source and sink be indicated on requests for service when being combined with another request for transmission service under the SPP OATT or service that is grand-fathered with respect to the SPP OATT.


Page 8 of 8

1700 PROFILING TRANSMISSION SERVICE (return to TOC) OASIS allows customers to submit a varying profile on a transmission service request for multiple periods of the same service increment. For example, a customer may submit a monthly request for 3 months with a capacity of 1 MW for the first two months and 100 MW for the third month. A request with a varying profile is allowed with the following condition. Business Practice A multiple-period hourly non-firm or yearly firm transmission service request may be submitted

with a varying profile. All other multi- period requests will be required to have a constant profile.

Transmission capacity withheld for rollover rights associated with a multi-year, yYearly fFirm

transmission service request approved with a varying profile will be the capacity granted for the

last year of the request.

Explanation SPP allows transmission service requests for multiple periods of the same service increment to be submitted as one OASIS reservation. Attachment P of the SPP OATT5 contains timing requirements prescribing when a request for each type of service may be submitted. Allowing customers to submit a multiple-period request with a varying profile provides an opportunity to circumvent the intent of the “No Earlier Than” timing requirements in Attachment P, with the exception of hourly non-firm and yYearly fFirm Transmission Service. The above business practice regarding varying profiles was implemented to prevent such potential abuse of the tTariff.

5 SPP OAT Attachment P - http://www.spp.org/publications/spp_tariff.pdf

1

SPP.org

BPWG August 7, 2012

Objective of the presentation (15 slides)

Review and discuss how the current Reservation and Scheduling practices will be impacted as result of implementation of the Integrated Market Place and CBA.

Review a possible alternative practice and discuss the impact it has on systems,

SPP.org

discuss the impact it has on systems, processes, tariff, modeling and customers.

2

2

Regional TariffPOR/POD’s

INDNKACY

NPPD OPPD

LES

SPP Tariff XXX

WAPA

MECMISO

AMMOMISO

AECI

SCSE

EES

CSWS

SPRMEDE

KCPLMPS

WRSECI

OKGEWFEC

SPS

GRDASPA

POR/PODinternal (16)

XXXAECILAM345

XXXIn Tariff throughcontract (1)EDDY

BLKW

ERCOTN

TSR

TSRTSR

SPP.org 3

CLEC

EES1st tier POR/POD(12)

XXXERCOTE

Current situation 2012-2013

ERCOTN

Changes as result of implementation Integrated Marketplace

We can go live with current practices:We can go live with current practices:All existing TSRs keep their “rights” and reserved capacity based on the current set of POR/POD’s and Source/Sink’s and current granularity

Submitting new TSRs still based on the current set of POR/PODs and Source/Sinks (no addition of SWPP as POR/POD or Source/Sink)

Evaluating TSRs based on current set of POR/PODs and Source/Sinks

AFC calculations based on current granularity and set of defined Zones.

Market Flow calculations based on current granularity and set of POR/PODs

SPP.org

Market Flow calculations based on current granularity and set of POR/PODs

TAG curtailments by NERC IDC based on current granularity.

4

3

What’s new in 2014

Tagging: Source CA (GCA) of Tags will be SWPP for Export Tags that Source from the SPP BA Area and the Sink CA (LCA) of Tags will beSource from the SPP BA Area and the Sink CA (LCA) of Tags will be SWPP for Import Tags that Sink in the SPP BA Area

Selling energy from the “SPP Market” for Export. Not source specific.Price is LMP of the “export interface”. Details still in discussion.

Sinking energy in the “SPP Market” for Import. Not sink specific.Price is LMP of the “import interface”. Details still in discussion.

Possible…(still under review)…no transmission fee for reserving PtP on SPP WebOasis for import into the “SPP Market”. Not sink specific.

SPP.org

Possible…(still under review)… no evaluation of PtP used for import/export into/out off the “SPP Market” for SPP Internal flow gates.

5

Note: If “SPP Market” (between quotes) is used in presentation it is indicating not source or sink specific.

What will be the same in 2014 till we implement alternative practices

Submitting and evaluating TSRs for Import and Export and internal to the SPP Market based on the current set of POR/PODs and Source/Sinks

Not (yet) possible to select SWPP as Source or Sink or select SWPP as POR or POD.

All TSR’s will be evaluated for AFC on SPP flow gates, RCF fl t d thi d t fl t

SPP.org

RCF flow gates and third party flow gates.

6

4

Regional TariffPOR/POD’s

INDNKACY

NPPD OPPD

LES

SPP Tariff XXX

WAPA

MECMISO

AMMOMISO

AECI

SCSE

EES

SPRMEDE

KCPLMPS

WRSECI

OKGEWFEC

SPS

GRDASPA

POR/PODinternal (16)

XXXAECILAM345

XXXIn Tariff throughcontract (1)EDDY

BLKW

ERCOTN

EES OKGE

Redbud EES

SPP.org 7

CLEC

EESCSWS 1st tier POR/PODXXXERCOTE

Example for current situation 2012-2013 and new situation 2014

ERCOTN

TSR TSRSource Sink POR POD

Redbud EES OKGE EESEES OKGE EES OKGE

Transmission SettlementPOR POD

OKGE EES




OKGE EES

ExportImport

WebOasisWebTrans

TransmissionSettlement

EES OKGE

AFC evaluationZone1 Zone2

OKGE EESEES OKGE

Tag TagSource Sink Source_CA Sink_Ca

GCA LCARedbud EES OKGE EES

EES OKGE EES OKGE

EES OKGE


OKGE EESEES OKGE


GCA LCARedbud EES SWPP EES

EES OKGE EES SWPP

EMS/RTRFCALCWebTrans

EtaggingRTOSS

SPP.org 8

ID CurtailmentSource Sink

OKGE EESEES OKGE

MFC adjustmentZone1 Zone2

OKGE N/AN/A OKGE


OKGE EESEES OKGE


OKGE N/AN/A OKGE

CURRENT2012-2013 2014

GO LIVENERC IDC

SPP MFC Calculator

5

Why pursuing changes to current practices

Desire to have the option to reserve a TSR and sell energy from the “SPP Market” and not be Source or POR specific. Use SWPP as Source.

Desire to have the option to reserve a TSR and import energy from neighboring Entities into the “SPP Market” and not be load, Sink or POD specific. Use SWPP as Sink.

SPP.org

specific. Use SWPP as Sink.

9

Possible changes to our practices need to be evaluated for impact in following areas

AFC Calculations Modeling (Commercial)

Tag validation (SPP RTOSS)

NERC IDC Tag curtailment calculations

Market flow calculation

Transmission settlement and Tariff billing

ARR/TCR process

Market settlement

Market Monitoring (gaming opportunities)

Long term planning

Tariff

Business Practices

Members systems and practices

SPP.org 10

JOA/CMP

6

Alternative 1. Business Practice

All existing TSRs keep their “rights” and reserved capacity based on the current set of POR/POD’s and Source/Sink’s and current granularity

Submitting new TSRs within SPP Market (for TCR/ARR purposes) still based on the current set of POR/POD’s and Source/Sink’s.

For the purpose of selling from the “SPP Market” or import into the “SPP Market” (not Source or Sink specific !!):

For all twelve 1tier POR/POD’s a set of new POR/POD’s will be added for submitting import and export TSRs. As an example:for Entergy: SWPP_IMP_EES, SWPP_EXP_EESfor AECI: SWPP IMP AECI SWPP EXP AECI

SPP.org

for AECI: SWPP_IMP_AECI, SWPP_EXP_AECI

The new import and export POR/POD represents the weighted average fleet of resources of a selected representative existing static POR/POD.

For example: SWPP_IMP_EES and SWPP_EXP_EES could be CSWS

11

Alternative 1. Business Practice Cont.

For import and export:

N t / i k ifi F i t i t th “SPP M k t” dNot source/sink specific: For import into the “SPP Market” and export from the “SPP Market” use SWPP as Source or Sink and the set of new import/export POR/POD’s.

TSR will not be evaluated for SPP internal flow gates, only for RCF and third party flow gates

TSR not to be used for ARR/TCR. (not evaluated for AFC on SPP flow gates)

SPP.org

Source / sink specific: For import into SPP Market to serve a specific load and export from a specific resource or set of resources of SPP Market to serve load outside the SPP Market:Use current set of source /sink and POR/POD’s internal to SPP Market.

12

7

Regional TariffBAs

INDNKACY

NPPD OPPD

LES SPP Tariff POR/POD’s (16)

XXX

WAPAMECMISO

AMMOMISO

AECI

XXXIn Tariff throughcontract (1)

NPPD OPPD

POD = SWPP_IMP_WAPAPOR=SWPP_EXP_WAPA

SPRMEDE

KCPLMPS

WRSECI

OKGEWFEC

SPS

GRDA

CSWS

SPA

1st tier BAsXXX

AECIWSCC

POR=SWPP_EXP_EESPOD=SWPP_IMP_EES

CSWS

MPS

EDE

TSRTo specific Load of MarketFrom specific set of resourcesEvaluated for SPP flow gatesEligible for ARR/TCR

SPP.org 13

CLEC

EESERCOT

Alternative 1. Business Practic

TSR

Import into SWPP MarketExport from SWPP MarketNot evaluated for SPP flow gatesNot eligible for ARR/TCR




OKGE EES



SWPP EES SPP_EXP_EES EES


OKGE EESCURRENT 2014 -2015

ExportImportExport

SPP_EXP_EES

EES OKGE


OKGE EESEES OKGE



EES OKGE EES OKGE

EES OKGESWPP EES


OKGE EESEES OKGE

CSWS EESTag Tag

Source Sink Source_CA Sink_CaGCA LCA

Redbud EES SWPP EESEES OKGE EES SWPP

CURRENT2012-2013

2014 2015Alternative 1. n/a?

n/a?

SPP.org 14


OKGE EESEES OKGE


OKGE N/AN/A OKGE

SWPP EES SWPP EESID Curtailment

Source Sink

OKGE EESEES OKGE

CSWS EESMFC adjustment

Zone1 Zone2

OKGE N/AN/A OKGE

CSWS N/A

Note: Example assumes SPPdefines CSWS BA as export zone for all export to EES

8




OKGE EES


Redbud EES OKGE EESEES OKGE EES OKGEEES SWPP EES SPP_IMP_EES


OKGE EESCURRENT 2014 – 2015

ExportImportImport

SPP_IMP_EES

EES OKGE


OKGE EESEES OKGE



EES OKGE EES SWPP

EES OKGEEES SWPP


OKGE EESEES OKGEEES CSWS


GCA LCARedbud EES SWPP EES

EES OKGE EES SWPP

CURRENT2012-2013

2014 2015Alternative 1. n/a?

n/a?

SPP.org 15


OKGE EESEES OKGE


OKGE N/AN/A OKGE

EES SWPP EES SWPPID Curtailment

Source Sink

OKGE EESEES OKGEEES CSWS


OKGE N/AN/A OKGEN/A CSWS

Note: Example assumes SPPdefines CSWS BA as import zone for all import from EES

PROCESS IMPACT

AFC CalculationsMedium impact on modelingLow or no impact softwareSame granularity as today

Low impact. Only modeling.

Alternative 1. Business Practice

Tag validation (SPP RTOSS)Low impact. Only modeling.

Adding new POR/POD’s to OATI tables

NERC IDC Tag curtailment calculationMedium, might be only modeling.

Adding new POR/POD’s to OATI tables

Market flow calculationMedium. Requires conversion of new

POR/POD on front end.

Transmission settlement and Tariff billingHigh, requires changes. Depends on transmission fee import/export

Market settlement No impact.

SPP.org 16

Market Monitoring (gaming opportunities) Medium / Low. Long term planning No changesTariff High, requires filingBusiness Practices Medium, lowTCR / ARR processes Low impact.Members systems and practices TBD

JOA/CMP No impact, only education of other

CMP Entities on methodology

9/5/2012

1

Improving Our Study ProcessA t 7 2012August 7, 2012Lanny [email protected] ∙ 501.614.3232

Background• Business problem:

o Studies take too long, leave applicants guessing as to costs

• Context o Decision made to seek outside perspective – innocentive.com

2

9/5/2012

2

Status on InnoCentive Efforts

• Challenge viewed by 479 solvers

16 l b itt d l ti l• 16 solvers submitted solution proposals

• 13 proposals provided to SPP for consideration

• 10 proposals rejected as lacking relevance to our business issue

• 4 proposals under consideration as possibly relevant

• Engineering tasked with providing feedback by early August

• Clarifying questions will be sent to submitters ASAP afterward

• Presenting to BPWG for input on August 7

• SPP required to make awards, if appropriate, by August 21

3

Selection Timeline and Requirements

• Key dates:o July 17 – SPP received solution proposals

o July 27 – Rejections due

o July 30 – Initial questions to submitters due

o August 2 – Refinement questions to submitters due

o August 21 – Decisions on awards dueg

• Our responsibility to submitters:o Ideas employed now or in the future must be compensated

o Evaluations must be based on Acceptance Criteria4

9/5/2012

3

Summary of Finalist Submissions

• No major breakthroughso Touch on – or put a twist on – ideas previously exploredo Touch on or put a twist on ideas previously explored

with BPWG

• Emphasize providing customer with maximum costo If cost exceeded, request pushed back to earlier stage

o Also advocate “insurance”

• Place responsibility on customers to make financial commitments early in process to avoid iterations

• Suggest use of probabilistic analysis to predict costs and/or forecast likelihood of study withdrawal

5

Highlights – Finalist 1

• Distinguishes between “large” vs. “small” customerso Large can pay extra to go straight to Definitive Impact Study

o Small customers must go through cluster study

• Sets different paths for mutually exclusive vs. multiple independent requests

• Advocates two avenues for cost certaintyAdvocates two avenues for cost certaintyo Cost insurance

o Maximum investment cost

6

9/5/2012

4


• Starts with assumption that only existing facilities and customers are in play for each requesto Impact to pending customers and facilities is not considered

• Calls for modularized upgrades to be added/ subtracted without further study

• Advocates “over‐selling” facilities on assumption that only so many requests will commitonly so many requests will commit

• Provides for maximum and minimum costs based on varying scenarios

7


• Calls for hybrid cluster/serial approacho Customer can opt for individual or shared interconnectiono Customer can opt for individual or shared interconnection

upgrade study, followed by cluster network upgrade study

• Allocates upgrade costs on a $/MW basis vs. impact basis

8

9/5/2012

5


• Emphasizes probabilistic/statistical methods o Focuses on assessing likelihood of gaining commitmento Focuses on assessing likelihood of gaining commitment

• Sets range of costs to address cost uncertaintyo Min and max cost and times established in Preliminary

Impact Study

o Customers who commit to cost range move into Definitive Impact StudyDefinitive Impact Study

o Exceeding cost range sends customer back to Preliminary

o Customer obligated to certain cost if they back out

• Calls for members to act as “community” in good faith9

Conclusion

QUESTIONS?

10

Southwest Power Pool BUSINESS PRACTICES … · Southwest Power Pool ... Ross also made a point that...

Documents

Transcript of Southwest Power Pool BUSINESS PRACTICES … · Southwest Power Pool ... Ross also made a point that...